Good luck to Chris Medlock, who has announced his candidacy in the race for Oklahoma State House District 69.
Technorati Tags: Chris Medlock
Oklahoma
About Me
Twitter Updates
Blogs
- Batesline
- Bowden McElroy, M.Ed.
- Brian C. Biggs
- crykeygen
- Don Singleton
- Dustbury
- Fix it with Cupcakes
- GetWriteOK
- Irritated Tulsan
- JenHartNSoul
- Living On Tulsa Time
- Lost Tulsa
- MedBlogged
- Tasha Does Tulsa
- The Contemplative Tulsan
- The Happy Housewife
- The Musings of a Muskogee Politico
- Tulsa Chiggers
- Tulsa Topics
- Who am I?
- Wild Ramblings
- WynnBlog
4 comments:
Chris has strong conservative credentials, a demonstrated ability to understand complex issues and the
independence to pursue sound public policy. I have strong confidence that he would do right by district 69
and his broader responsibility for Good Government, however, he stated in a Mayoral debate, to the surprise of some,
that he supported Regionalism. I suggest to Chris that it would be helpful if would explain fully what regionalism
means to him and what urban policy he would pursue at the Capitol.
I don’t purport to speak for Chris, but I believe that his definition of regionalism differs from that of the common good ol’ boy. In their way of thinking, outlying communities feed off of Tulsa. We sell them water cheap, we shop in their towns, and they benefit from our sales tax, etcetera. Meanwhile we take all the low income housing projects, we pay all the bills, our schools decline, our crime rate increases, and our population falls.
Medlock’s vision is more balanced. It recognizes that Tulsa and its suburbs need each other. They work together for the common good. We provide water but they pay a fair price, they take some of the low income housing projects, and so on. I also don’t believe that his definition includes a system where by Tulsa’s authority is subjugated by that of some regional body. It is simply cooperation…
I think you have accurately portrayed the understanding supporters had prior to the Mayoral debate.
Chris said in the Mayoral debate that some of his supporters might be surprised that he
does support Regionalism. Because he thought some supporters would be surprised, indicates he
believed there was a difference between his views and theirs. I just think it would good to have a
clear understanding of his views of Regionalism.
I believe that his statement was in reference to how the regionalism had become a bad word in the eyes of many. Therefore it would be a shock to learn that he was for regionalism...that is until you understand how he defines it.
Post a Comment